Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Spiridon Cosmin Alexandru (2011)
Journal: Annals of Computational Economics
Types: Article
Subjects: critical; performance; market structure; added value at factor cost; turnover; profit ; gross investment; gross result of the exercise
jel: jel:M29, jel:M21, jel:M20
According to neoclassical theory, the relationship between the price, respectively of marginal cost and market structures, the methods for determining the performance of a firm or of an industry, deviate from the model of perfect competition. Assessing performance involves performing comparisons, reporting that their reference level can be a standard value, or a statistical value which can be a national-regional average, a homogeneous group, or an average value at a market level. Modern theories of the firm view that they may have other objectives than profit, which need to be taken into account when analyzing performance. Therefore between indicators for assessing the economic performance of an entity or a certain level of aggregation can not lack the profit or the gross operating surplus (gross profit), gross or net added value, turnover, as well as effort indicators like gross investment, tangible, intermediate consumption, cost of production, labor productivity, energy consumption, total productivity of production factors, etc.. It will be presented the main economic and financial indicators of enterprises, by class size and ownership in Romania.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 2. Cowling, (edit)
    • 3. Clarke, R.
    • 4. Dixit A.
    • I., Microeconomie. Bazele microeconomice ale activităţii agenţilor economici, Ed. Mirton, Timişoara, 2008, p. 104-106; p. 176-177; p. 227-228.
    • K. Market structure and Corporate Behaviour: Theorz and Empirical Analysis of the Firm, Gray - Mills, London, 1997; Industrial Economics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1985; Recent Developments in Oligopoly Theory, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings vol. 72, 1982, p. 12-17; I., Economie politică, Ed. Economică, p. 122-124.
    • 5. Ignat, Pohoaţă, Clipa, Luţac, Gh.
    • 6. Richard, G. „Economia pozitivă”, Ed. Eonomică, Bucureşti, 1999, p. 360-368. Lipsey, K. Alec Chrystal
    • 7. Russu C.,
    • Economie industrială, Editura Economică, Bucureşti, 2003, p. 308; p. 408-411.
    • Price Rigidities and Market Structure, American Economic Review, no. 71, 1984, p. 350-355;
    • Economic Teory of the Industry, University, Press Cambridge, 1984.
    • Romanian Statistical Yearbook, 2009 and 2010.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article